similar to: Override dead

Hi All, I am hoping someone can help me with a project I am doing at work. I warn you in advance that this will be a long post, but I wanted to provide as much information as I could to explain what was going on. Any help would be very much appreciated and welcomed as my boss would like to see this up and running this week. I have been scouring various documents on advanced routing for a

Hi all :) there is somekind of strange Routing problem that im getting with Linux-2.6.16 and iproute 2.6.16 , when i use command like : ip route add default nexthop via 1.1.1.1 dev eth0 nexthop via 1.1.1.2 dev eth1 all packets goes on 1.1.1.2 ( always last interface ) , whats is the problem ? this situation also tested with equalize flag , on two physical interface and etc ... -- Lady Luck

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70 Summary: udp connection(snmp) not being tracked. Product: netfilter/iptables Version: patch-o-matic Platform: All OS/Version: Debian GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: major Priority: P2 Component: connection tracking AssignedTo:

Hello, We have debian with 2.4.19-pre8 kernel We active the load balancing with two ethernets to internet, wih the command: ip rule add from 128.1.3.1/32 lookup host_proxy preference 2060 ip route add default table host_proxy proto static nexthop via 80.25.175.1 dev eth0 \ nexthop via 212.170.14.1 dev eth1 when see the route

Hello! I have access server with 4 uplinks (nice, huh?). I ran RedHat 7.3. Yesterday I did an upgrade to RedHat 9. After upgrade Linux says the third link is bad: # ip route show 2.2.2.0/30 dev eth2 scope link src 2.2.2.2 4.4.4.0/30 dev eth4 scope link src 4.4.4.4 3.3.3.0/29 dev eth3 scope link src 3.3.3.3 1.1.1.0/28 dev eth1 scope link src 1.1.1.1 10.1.1.0/24 dev eth0 scope link

Hello, We have 3 DSL connections connected to eth3 and another interface with a dedicated link in eth0 (main table) We want to balance selected traffic (using fwmark and iptables) through our 3 DSL connections in a secondary table named DSL (without using the dedicated link in eth0), but the next command is not accepted, and gives us the following error: # ip route add default

Hello people: I''m new in the forum. I''ve implemented the script for load balancing of "Linux Advanced Routing & Traffic Control HowTo" and I''ve a question: When I run the next command : "ip route" I get the folowing information: -------------- 192.168.0.32/27 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.0.33 192.168.0.96/27 dev eth2 proto

Hi all, ive been using the nano howto to load balance to adsl links for a good while now ive got our live server running kernel 2.6.11.6 and these links work fine. i set up another server same model of machine and used the same kernel config ( wanted to try some tos stuff out) 2.6.11.6 but this one doesnt balance properly. what ever i put in table 222 (which is looked at from all sources) it

Hi folks, i spent my whole day trying to set up my linux router using load balancing with multiple uplinks. I mainly focused on the nano howto, but somewhere I have a big mistake within my head. Basically the load-balancing is working, but not on a per-connection basis - just on a per packet basis. Practically this is not usable of course <g> But as far as I understood it should work..

Hello, I''m trying to set up a gateway for a local network to use two dsl lines. Ok, I read the LARTC howto and set up two routing tables and the correct balancing default gw. It works fine for connections originating locally on the gw machine. Then I added two iptables rules on the nat table: iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.4.0/24 -o $TI_IF -j SNAT --to-source $TI_IP iptables

Hi! I''ve 5 DSL routers and a linux router in a switch. The linux router is doing NAT for a LAN network, but it freezes when I set up load balancing with this command: ip route add default proto static\ nexthop via 192.168.1.10 dev eth1\ nexthop via 192.168.1.20 dev eth1\ nexthop via 192.168.1.30 dev eth1\ nexthop via 192.168.1.40 dev eth1\ nexthop

Hi, I am connected to two DSL providers (DSL 1 - 1Mbps downlink/384kbps uplink and DSL 2 - 2Mbps downlink/512kpbs uplink) I would like to only allow ftp, pop3 and http via the DSL 1 and only smtp, ipsec and pptp via DSL 2. How can I do so? Can I use iproute to route these protocols? Below is my ip routing: - # DSL 1 ip route add 2.2.2.208/30 dev eth0 src 2.2.2.210 table 1 ip route add

Hello lartc! I have strange problem setting load balancing over 4 interfaces. Something won''t accept more than 3 interfaces, While setting: ip route add default scope global \ nexthop via 0.0.0.0 dev pvc0 weight 1 \ nexthop via 0.0.0.0 dev pvc1 weight 1 \ nexthop via 0.0.0.0 dev pvc2 weight 1 It''s ok: ip r l default nexthop dev pvc0

Hi! I have many problems getting this thing to work. There''s a host with two network interfaces, where there are two routers to Internet in two separated networks. The host uses multihop routing for deciding to which router send the packets... but the routing decision is wrong made. Some packets with source address of one NIC, go to other network. I have a host with three NICs in it:

Hi all, I have implemented a solution with a machine balancing the network load between two DSL providers as is explained in the LARTC Howto. It is apparently working correctly, but i have some problems. The problem is basically that some packets go out by each ADSL interface with the source address of the other ADSL interface. I think that the routing based on source address isn''t

yes, this is a crazy subject. I have 4 ADSL lines to the same provider, which even have the same gateway. Those lines are connected to the same machine (more crazyness: even connected to the same nic. it works fine, I swear). this machine will serve this conenction to a local net. so, I setup the ifaces correctly, everything works. I add balancing using this command: # ip route replace default

Hello I am using linux box as a network loadbalance router. ----------------- ------------ |LAN| - |eth0 eth1(1.1.1.2) | DSL1 ------- |DSLAM (1.1.1.1) | | eth2(1.1.1.10) | DSL2 ------- |DSLAM (1.1.1.9) | ---------------- ------------ But I have a

Hi! In our students'' hostel we have 6 DSL lines (dialups to different providers); we have set up a linux box (currently running 2.6.11-rc2-mm2, but the problem described hereafter also applies to previous 2.6-series kernels) with help from http://lartc.org/howto/lartc.rpdb.multiple-links.html#AEN298 Our Setup looks like this: 10.0.0.0/8 10.70.255.1 +----------+ +-----------+ |

Hi all, I have read and done the LARTC HOW-to and almost everything work''s execpt from the inside network. When load balancing over the two access it only work on the linux router/nat machine 1) I am running stock mandrake kernel 2.6.8.1-12mdk and using stock shorewall config 2.0.8 2) I have two internet link and two internals link. Load balance setup work for the linux router/nat

Hi! The Netfilter project proudly presents: nftables 0.7 This release contains many accumulated bug fixes and new features available up to the (upcoming) Linux 4.10-rc1 kernel release. * Facilitate migration from iptables to nftables: At compilation time, you have to pass this option. # ./configure --with-xtables And libxtables needs to be installed in your system. This allows